because he's going to be asked that question, we assume, by any reputable law maker. here is what i'm concerned about and i think where the story is. if you want ambassador rice to be the next secretary of state, along with getting the benghazi facts out, you have to find out, number one, why she was put out there, why she was put out with insufficient information, why, as i just found out now, john brennan was in washington, tom donnellan was in washington, david petraeus was in washington. they trot out the u.n. ambassador. >> where eric and i have had our disputes in the past is on the day of the attack, the september 11 attack in benghazi. i agree with eric that what happened up until september 11 deserves scrutiny, intense investigation. why wasn't there -- >> brian: i'm talking about afterwards. >> then following the attack, i also believe that's why i coined the phrase benefiting gate. why did they send out the u.n. ambassador? why did they give her a brief that was obviously flimsy?